canon 100mm f2.8l vs 60mm f2.8
11860
Hopefully, you've already made your decision since the prices of both lenses has gone up significantly. I have these two lenses and both lenses are incredibly sharp. The 60mm's IQ in many respects is indistinguishable from the 100mm's. The build quality of the 60 is very nice as well although it isn't weather sealed. The two main advantages the 100mm brings to the table are IS--which would be of limited value with the 60mm--, and length--the extra 40mm means you don't need to get as close to those creepy crawly critters. IS doesn't add much for shorter focal lengths. A lot of macro shooters claim IS doesn't matter regardless because they always shoot with a tripod. I shoot with a tripod only when I have to (I'm stubborn). Thus, I do like it on the 100mm. I really see the value when I switch to my 135L. The shake is quite obvious and would be just a bit better for the 100mm without IS. The added length is indisputably worthwhile. However, you have to determine whether these benefits are worth paying 2.5 times the price.
466981
Hi. I don't have a comparison. With image stabilization the f/2.8 is not required for most people. The f/4L is much lighter. All of the L series are good quality. I suggest checking the photo magazines where they do extensive lab tests under all conditions.
101688
If you're looking for good quality and use a canon the 50mm f1.8 is a great and cheap lens. If you're looking for a macro lens I use the canon macro lens EF.S 60mm. I liked it better then the sigma macro lens.
624550
I have the 2.8L lens, and I love it, but I wish it had IS. In my opinion, the only real advantage of the 2.8 is its greater light gathering power, to shoot inside or in deep shadows. The f4 with the IS can do most everything you want, especially if you have a camera with a high ISO. I don't know of any differences in the glass.
809309
It will be almost identical - the 60D is a 1.6 crop, so 10mm is effectively 16. I would (and have) just shoot with the 60D + 10-22.
725756
The big difference is the image sensor, the HFS100 has 8.59 megapixels and the HF200 has 3.29 megapixels. On the Canon site you can do a nice side by side comparison of all the differences.
883998
Main difference is sensor. Both are exactly the same size and will probably fit in jacket pocket with lens such as 27/2.8. You should also look at Fuji x100s which has a shallow profile due to build in lens
204310
The 85mm is perfect for portraits on a Full frame an almos equivilant on the 60d will be the 50mm 1.4. In my opinion a 50mm and the macro will be a better choice.
1851323
Canon makes two 100mm Macro lenses. The L series lens is the f/2.8 L IS USM with a filter size of 67mm. The non-L Series lens is the f/2.8 USM with a filter size of 58mm.
2037231
On a crop-sensor body like the 70D, the 35mm f/2 IS USM has an equivalent focal length of 56mm on a full-frame camera. I bought this lens for the 60D after trying out a friend's 50mm f/1.4 and found the 50mm on a crop-sensor body wasn't wide enough to capture enough of people standing 5 feet away for portraiture. The 35mm has a natural feeling field of view on a crop body closer to your own field of vision as compared to the 50mm, which feels tighter. From a technical standpoint, the 35mm worked great on my 60D - fast focus, sharp images, and IS was extremely useful. Since the lens is designed for a full-frame sensor, you won't experience much vignetting on a crop sensor either. The lens has a slightly larger front element (67mm), but it isn't a heavy lens - quite comfortable to use.
1858499
Yeah buying a zoom lens for indoor low light shooting is where photography starts to become expensive. Canon's 70-200 f2.8L is over a thousand dollars, so depending on how far away from the subject you are, I'd suggest a prime lens at any one of several focal lengths offered at apertures of f1.4, f1.8, or f2.8. I've personally had great success using the 50mm f1.8, but since you're asking about telephoto zoom lenses, it seems you might need a little more reach. The Canon 200mm f2.8L lists for $750, and the 100mm f2 is about $400, and that's about the same price as the 85mm f1.8. So it depends on your needs pretty much.
2072503
True enough but the 35mm f2 is getting pretty hard to find and the 50mm f1.8 is a real bargain for the image quality at only $80.
735070
As far as build quality goes the 40 beats it without question, also a lot smaller. The 50 on the other hand does have a larger aperture for more blurred backgrounds and better in low light. They are both very sharp. I do perfer the auto focus on the 40 over the 50. If you want to save 100$ go with the 50. You won't be let down with either lenses. I own both
935597
It's very close in quality to its 1.4 counterpart. The L version has a very slight edge in contrast and sharpness. I opted for the 35mm f2 IS because the difference wasn't large enough for me to justify spending twice as much for the 1.4.Hope this helps!
1346890
These are 2 different focal lengths and on a crop camera it makes a big difference. I have both, and find the 50 f1.4 works best for indoors, portraits, etc. I use the 85 outside but must admit the 50 is a lot more used. Both wonderful--probably should get the 50 first.
1717527
A6000 is 24MP sensor, not 16MP, so it is 50% more. Obviously it will show the advantage in resolution. Auto focus is much faster and more reliable with more coverage area for Phase detect. Check imaging resource details review, they compare and show the differences. http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a6000/sony-a6000A.HTM
578411
What camera bodies do you currently own and for what type of shooting?? For portrait, people love the 85, some even say they prefer the 100mm. I own the 50L, the only thing I can say is that shooting at f1.2 takes practice, and the auto focus is a bit slower than most other modern day lens with AF.